Active Points For Spell Builds

[Guest Worldmaker]

A couple of my players have come to me and complained that the builds I'm using for some spells are either pathetically weak in combat, or else are instantly deadly. This has caused me to wonder what a good base Active Point total for spells would be.

 

This is my first Fantasy Hero campaign, and I'm trying to come up with as much of it myself as I can, so its nearly all homebrew. Magic is rare but not unknown in my campaign setting, and its supposed to be impressive and scary, but I don't want spellcasters dominating the combat sessions.

 

So what do you use as a good base for the Active Cost of spells?

[Guest Admiral C]

Re: Active Points For Spell Builds

 

If I ever had players that were HERO savy, which has not happened yet, I've toyed with the idea of creating group grimoire where all players could add spells wether they were playing wizards or not. Adding subject to GM approval of course. So the notion of active point caps for spells has come up a few times.

 

What I've noticed is that attack spells are usually moderately powerful at 40-45 active points and powerful at about 60. At 45 points you can have a 30 point attack power with a +1/2 Advantage and at 60 30 points with a +1 Advantage. I don't include a low catagory as most players would be uniterested in a 10-25 point attack power for the most part, sure 5d6 EB can be a pretty good investment when a mage squares off against bandits with an average ED of 3+armor but typically players want something powerful and versitile enough to fight monsters with higher defenses

 

For other spells it's moderate around 25-30 and powerful around 45. Of course the designation "other spells" includes powers that would be powerful at 15 such as +5 Perception or N-Ray vision but that has to be handled on a case by case basis.

[Curufea]

Re: Active Points For Spell Builds

 

I tend to limit by DC, rather than by active points.

[Blue Jogger]

Re: Active Points For Spell Builds

 

I use 10 "active" points for simple small spells. 20 "active" points for bigger spells and 30 for the really big powerful spells.

 

Realize that active points doesn't quite work for how weak or powerful that spell is. If it adds to combat effectiveness, it might be twice as powerful than the active points might place it. If it is just used for convenience and has some pretty big limitations, then the active point might be half or even less.

 

Here's some quick examples:

Light spells is something like 27 active points, just to light up a large room with sunlight. Since it has a -1 Only to make Light, you might consider this effectively 13 "active" points. A cheaper way is just to give yourself and a a handful of friends Night Vision that's 10 active points. Weird.

 

A sharpening spell is only 15 active points, but it gives that fighter another die of killing damage. This might be as effective as a 2D6 HKA (2D6+1 w/STR) Flaming Hands spell which would be 30 active points.

[Guest Worldmaker]

Re: Active Points For Spell Builds

 

I tend to limit by DC' date=' rather than by active points.[/quote']

 

 

Can you elaborate on that?

[Guest Admiral C]

Re: Active Points For Spell Builds

 

I tend to limit by DC' date=' rather than by active points.[/quote']

 

I typically start with active points and then check DCs. I've had a hard time explaining to players sometimes that you don't use one or another, their both ways of gauging effectiveness of powers.

[1EyedJack]

Re: Active Points For Spell Builds

 

Active point limits are tricky, in some cases a relativly harmless spell can have a high active point cost, while effective spells can have a relativly low active point cost. DC limits are a better gauge of how powerful a spell is. Most important is that as a game master you must decide what the scope of magic is, and either design all the magic in the campaign, or use exisiting published material and limit spells based on weak, average, or strong versions of the spells that are availiable in your campaign.

[CTaylor]

Re: Active Points For Spell Builds

 

Look at the other attacks in your campaign, how many Damage Classes are they throwing around? Are there 3D6 killing attacks, 1D6? Does a martial artist whip out 7D6? That gives you a base level for active points for attack in your game: here's what you are doing with weapons, that's how much you get for spells, too. Defenses should run roughly the same (although magi should usually have better defenses than people using pieces of metal; theirs shuts off when they are stunned and takes trouble and time to turn on).

[Curufea]

Re: Active Points For Spell Builds

 

Can you elaborate on that?

 

I look at the amount of damage I want my PCs able to dish out. I'm more lenient on active points, because sometimes the limitations or the creativeness of the spell itself outweigh the importance of the points.

If I intend my PCs to encounter most creatures with low defenses, I limit their DC.

 

Generally, DCs are only raised if they get skills and martial arts, or spend time researching spells.

[badger3k]

Re: Active Points For Spell Builds

 

Look at the other attacks in your campaign' date=' how many Damage Classes are they throwing around? Are there 3D6 killing attacks, 1D6? Does a martial artist whip out 7D6? That gives you a base level for active points for attack in your game: here's what you are doing with weapons, that's how much you get for spells, too. Defenses should run roughly the same (although magi should usually have better defenses than people using pieces of metal; theirs shuts off when they are stunned and takes trouble and time to turn on).[/quote']

 

Ditto on that - if your lightning bolt is doing the same damage as a broadsword, it may be underpowered (unless it is AP, NND, etc). Even an Area Effect sword strike can be good. But it depends on what you want magic to be - from the sound of it, you want it to be big. Take the damage (or equivalent effect) for non-magic and double it.

 

Pretty much I would go by the suggested limits from the 5er Rulebook (did we ever name it?), but focus more on the effect then the point cost.

 

A magic system is hard. My first one was less then spectacular. I put too many limitations that made it not effective. Damage was good, but if the spell never hits...

 

Looking through spells I've made, I range from 10 or so, to 60 for most, up to 140+ for really major spells. Of course, the higher power ones cost more, and are harder to cast, but that's the tradeoff.

 

I'm not sure if this might help, but here is my link that has some spells I've converted and hopefully some of my own, but it's been a while since I touched that site. http://homepage.mac.com/badger3k/BadgerHero/4/4.html

 

You can see what others have done like this over at: http://www.herogames.com/forums/showthread.php?t=23298

 

That might help you get some ideas on power levels of spells that are effective (I hope they are effective).

[CTaylor]

Re: Active Points For Spell Builds

 

Keep in mind that energy damage almost always is going to hurt people more than physical. Thus, your 6D6 energy blast lightning bolt will actually be more effective than a 6D6 boot to the head from a martial artist.

[Guest Worldmaker]

Re: Active Points For Spell Builds

 

Keep in mind that energy damage almost always is going to hurt people more than physical. Thus' date=' your 6D6 energy blast lightning bolt will actually be more effective than a 6D6 boot to the head from a martial artist.[/quote']

 

 

That might be part of the problem. I hadn't actually thought about that, but since a basic sword is a 1d6+1 HKA, and the lightning bolt spell I was using was a 4d6 RKA... I think it might have gone a bit overboard.

 

I'm beginning to think my magic system is well and truly screwed, not just the spells involved, but the entire system.

[badger3k]

Re: Active Points For Spell Builds

 

That might be part of the problem. I hadn't actually thought about that, but since a basic sword is a 1d6+1 HKA, and the lightning bolt spell I was using was a 4d6 RKA... I think it might have gone a bit overboard.

 

I'm beginning to think my magic system is well and truly screwed, not just the spells involved, but the entire system.

 

All my games have one inviolable rule - if I messed up, it will get fixed. I've had to redo characters when we discovered something was broken (not during the session, but afterwards). I trashed my whole system and am trying to work up a new one. Any good system takes time and will have to be tweaked.

 

What are the basic limitations that all spells have to take? ie - spell skill rolls, END reserve, charges, focus, concentration....the whole bit. Why not post it here and we can look at it, take it apart, and make suggestions?

[Markdoc]

Re: Active Points For Spell Builds

 

I don't worry about active points or DC. Neither means very much in isolation. What I tend to look at is effect.

 

In other words, "how much damage (or other stuff) will this power do to an average target?"

 

A 4d6 Lightning bolt will do - on average - about 8 BOD and 25 Stun, to a reasonably tough, armoured target after Defences. On a good (but not exceptional) roll, it'll do 12 BOD and 60+ stun after defences, meaning it'll almost always seriously wound and often one shot kill most professional soldiers. A good (but not exceptional) roll will let you seriously wound a Dragon in one hit and will incinerate a troll. By pretty much any definition, that's some serious weaponry there - on average rolls, you'd need to hit the same human target 10 or 12 times to do as much BOD with your standard sword and the sword's likely ineffective against the dragon. The two attacks are not even in the same league.

 

The trick is to examine what the spell does, what the defences - if any - are and how likely it is to take effect. Even a 1 pip killing attack can be deadly, if most targets have no effective defence (like, for example a swarm of stinging insects). Make it continuous and it can be lethal - even though the active points are low.

 

The same applies to most non-standard attacks. Even a couple of dice of Flash can be very effective, since most targets will lack any defence. So just think about what the spell would do to a lowly minion, to one of your characters and to a couple of what you consider tough and very tough monsters. Look at both average rolls and good rolls. If you are happy with the outcome, you should be good to go.

 

cheers, Mark

[Killer Shrike]

Re: Active Points For Spell Builds

 

It depends on the Magic System. If the Magic System uses AP as a gauge or cut for something, then I fall into that model -- the main example being the numerous Vancian Magic Systems on my site which group spells in increments of 15 AP from "0 Level / Cantrip" at 15 AP up to "9th Level" at 150 AP.

 

If a Magic System is Familiarity based I normally put strong limitations on AP, and on the very low end (15-45 AP); the Validus Familiaritas Magic Systems on my site are examples of this

 

If a Magic System doesn't assign any meaning to AP, then I don't worry about it too much. I'm more concerned with actual effect / DC in real terms.

 

If the Magic System requires players to pay the Real Cost of their spells / abilities then I don't worry about it at all, I worry about making sure Lims taken on abilities are legitimate and priced right -- the RC impact serves as its own control.

 

If a Magic System is Multipower based, the size of the MP reserves and the need to have multiple effects active will drive the AP.

 

If a Magic System is Elemental Control based then the natural boxing mechanism of its cost structure will force players to find a tenable balance between AP and RC that will impact them over time.

 

If a Magic System works via skills then I manufacture the normal -1 per AP/10 model and END costs which forces a kind of parity where more power (AP) is sometimes too much (can't make the roll and or pay the END reliably).

 

Etc etc etc. The important thing to understand is that AP is just a single measure and putting limits or structure around AP is just a control mechanism. There are many other measures / controls available that effect / affect / model different things. The right measure or control for a particular Magic System (or any structured set of abilities) will vary based upon what you are trying to measure or control, and it usually ends up that a combination of such are called for.

 

 

Here is a collection of documents that discusses various concerns around this area in great detail: Magic System Design; you may find something useful for you...

[Guest Worldmaker]

Re: Active Points For Spell Builds

 

Killer Shrike, I've got to tell you that most of that might as well have been in Sanskrit for all that I understood it.

 

 

Here's the system I use:

 

I like the idea of a wizard knowing more spells than he can readily use, so I use Variable Power Pools. Each wizard character has a pool from which they cast spells from their list of known spells. (Yeah, sort of like the D&D model). Once a wizard has decided which spells are "active", he can use those spells any number of times (like they were powers in a superhero campaign).

 

The control cost on a pool is required to carry "No Skill Roll To Change (+1/2)", "Only Spells From The Character's Known Spells List (-1/2)" and "Can Only Change Spells With Access To The Wizard's Spell Books and Adequate Study Time (-1/4)", where "adequate study time" is a function of the new spell's active cost (the higher the active cost, the more time it takes to adapt the pool to the new spell).

 

In addition, the individual spells are required to have "Requires A Power Skill: (Magical Philosophy) Roll (-1/2), "Spell (-1/2)", and usually (but not always) "Gestures (-1/4)", and "Incantations (-1/4)". All other limitations and advantages are added on a spell by spell basis but include the usual suspects (Reduced Endurance, Foci, and so on).

 

The "magical philosophies" are the various "schools of thought" under which arcane magic is divided. Again, I tapped the D&D well to go with Evocation, Summoning, Conjuration, and so on.

 

 

So... any suggestions/comments/complaints?

[Killer Shrike]

Re: Active Points For Spell Builds

 

Killer Shrike, I've got to tell you that most of that might as well have been in Sanskrit for all that I understood it.

What exactly is unclear about it?

[Guest Worldmaker]

Re: Active Points For Spell Builds

 

The terminology, for one.

 

Assume that I haven't done an in depth analysis of the whatchamajiggers of game play and thus have no idea what you mean by "Vancian system", Familiarity, models, measure, and so on.

 

Your website is just as confusing to me.

[Killer Shrike]

Re: Active Points For Spell Builds

 

The terminology, for one.

 

Assume that I haven't done an in depth analysis of the whatchamajiggers of game play and thus have no idea what you mean by "Vancian system", Familiarity, models, measure, and so on.

 

Your website is just as confusing to me.

 

{shrugs} Very well, I'll make a mental note not to waste your time in the future with further input. Good luck in your endeavors.

[Guest Worldmaker]

Re: Active Points For Spell Builds

 

{shrugs} Very well' date=' I'll make a mental note not to waste your time in the future with further input. Good luck in your endeavors.[/quote']

 

 

Okay... stomping out in a huff is certainly one way to do it. The other is you could simplify your language to help me understand it. But hey, if you want to do the stompy thing, I'm not going to stop you.

[Killer Shrike]

Re: Active Points For Spell Builds

 

Okay... stomping out in a huff is certainly one way to do it. The other is you could simplify your language to help me understand it. But hey' date=' if you want to do the stompy thing, I'm not going to stop you.[/quote']

 

I'm not "stomping" or doing any other such thing. What I'm doing is wisely not wasting my time on someone that seems rude, belligerent, and disrespectful. If you lack the capacity to comprehend and the people skills to seek guidance in an appropriately nonabrasive fashion, that's not my problem its yours. I'm not under any sort of requirement to bother breaking things down to you further than I already have in this thread or the resources I make freely available, and your attitude hardly disposes me to do so.

 

So, again, good luck in your endeavors, and good bye.

[Guest Worldmaker]

Re: Active Points For Spell Builds

 

I'm not "stomping" or doing any other such thing. What I'm doing is wisely not wasting my time on someone that seems rude, belligerent, and disrespectful. If you lack the capacity to comprehend and the people skills to seek guidance in an appropriately nonabrasive fashion, that's not my problem its yours. I'm not under any sort of requirement to bother breaking things down to you further than I already have in this thread or the resources I make freely available, and your attitude hardly disposes me to do so.

 

So, again, good luck in your endeavors, and good bye.

 

 

Huh.

 

I tell you that I didn't understand anything you said, tell you that I have no idea what anything you said or what you wrote on your website means because the technical language is too dense, and asked you to assume I wasn't as educated on the subject as you were, in response to which you stomp off in a huff, but I'm the one being rude and abbrasive.

 

Okay. Whatever you say. I'm here for advice and help, not for a fight. Sorry I wasn't up to your standards of whatever. No hard feelings.

[JmOz]

Re: Active Points For Spell Builds

 

The terminology, for one.

 

Assume that I haven't done an in depth analysis of the whatchamajiggers of game play and thus have no idea what you mean by "Vancian system", Familiarity, models, measure, and so on.

 

Your website is just as confusing to me.

 

Vancian: Refers to a system of magic based on Jack Vance's Dying earth series, where a spell is "memorized" and forgoten when cast, like mose D&D games

 

Familiarity, I beleive in this context is refering to a system where you paying for a skill to cast each spell (So you would have FIREBALL on an 11-)

 

Model is just a way of saying what you are trying to achieve with the system, If I am trying to model a system like D&D's magic system then I am trying to make a system similar to D&D magic

 

Measure: The point here is that when you are attempting to balance a magic system it is not just about active points, you might want to look at real points, or maybe DAmage Classes, or a balance of all of the above

[Guest Worldmaker]

Re: Active Points For Spell Builds

 

Thanks, that makes more sense now.

[badger3k]

Re: Active Points For Spell Builds

 

Gregg, can you give a sample of a spell that a character might use. How many spells can a caster have in their VPP?

 

In your system, the character buys skill in casting in each specific school - correct? If so, then a character might be better at some of their spells then others - correct?

 

Do they buy individual spells to put in their spellbook? Do they pay for the spells themselves or buy them as part of a skill (1 point = 1 spell), or do they just get a certain amount for free?

 

So far, it seems ok in terms of general setup. I'm just trying to get a feel for it, but I don't see anything bad with what you have.

 

How about posting one spell that your players say is overpowered (maybe that 4d6 RKA lightning bolt?) and one that is underpowered?